Military Review

Step forward, two steps back.

34
Step forward, two steps back.



NATO representatives persist in believing that Russia is the number one threat to the military-political bloc. A clear testimony is the recent statement by the official London on the creation of two super mobile "shock brigades" ("Strike Brigades").

Over the past two years, members of the North Atlantic Alliance have steadily increased their spending: in 2015, the defense budget increased by 0,6%, this year military spending increased by another 1,5%. One of the main pretexts, under which representatives of the military-political bloc regularly invest money in the NATO piggy bank, is to contain the aggression invented by the West on the part of Russia.

The next initiative in the framework of the idea of ​​supporting the Russophobic myth is being implemented by Great Britain today. The other day, representatives of the Ministry of Defense of the United Kingdom announced the formation of two super-mobile "shock brigades", intended, as the British Defense Ministry reports, to "repel Russian aggression." The new formations will be equipped with armored vehicles on the Ajax platform, which, according to the British military, is a worthy alternative to Russian tanks Armata and combat vehicles on the Kurganets platform.

A distinctive feature of the formed tactical units, according to officials of the Ministry of Defense of Great Britain, should be efficiency. New brigades are planned to be used as a mobile reserve, which in the shortest possible time will be sent to any Eastern European region, from Romania to the Baltic states.

If we draw analogies, the actions of Foggy Albion are reminiscent of the continuation of the NATO scenario, in which Poland and the Baltic countries have been defending themselves for several years from the fictional enemy in the person of the Russian side. Apparently, the "military peacemaker" decided to connect the fifth member to the Baltic four. At the same time, a new participant responsible for intimidating Russia was once again chosen, to put it mildly, unsuccessfully.

According to experts, the effectiveness of guns with telescopic shells, which are equipped with "Ajax", is overvalued. Note that the United States prefers classic shells, and the Russian military completely departed from the practice of using telescopic munitions. In addition to the above, the weapon for firing has a large number of gears and mechanical processing, which makes it unsuitable for combat operations. “Ajax” will look good at the parade, but they are not suitable for a big war, ”commented military experts.

It is also necessary to emphasize that the first battalion is planned to be formed no earlier than 2020 of the year. Thus, the combat effectiveness of the already ineffective military units after more than a year, 3 will be close to zero.

Be that as it may, with the hands of the British military, NATO is once again trying to strengthen its position in Eastern Europe, although this time in a rather peculiar way. In this case, it is not so much a technical confrontation, but rather an attempt at psychological intimidation.

In addition, it is impossible not to note the successes of the Russian military-industrial complex, which, it seems, have so badly bothered the West that the North Atlantic Alliance decided to boast of its militaristic experiments. At the same time, the breakthrough in the defense sphere presented to the public is more like a step back, which does not seem to bother our "partners."
Author:
34 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mikhail Polnikov
    Mikhail Polnikov 29 December 2016 06: 01
    +1
    Afraid means respected ...
    1. russkyvoin
      russkyvoin 29 December 2016 07: 04
      +2
      Quote: Mikhail Polnikov
      Afraid means respected ...

      Not at all. Respect for fear can not be achieved.
      1. Mikhail Polnikov
        Mikhail Polnikov 29 December 2016 07: 55
        +2
        Sorry if sarcasm is invisible in my statement ...
      2. iConst
        iConst 29 December 2016 11: 50
        +1
        Quote: russkyvoin
        Quote: Mikhail Polnikov
        Afraid means respected ...

        Not at all. Respect for fear can not be achieved.

        Yah? And I am ready to prove that Mikhail Polnikov is right.
        1. vmo
          vmo 29 December 2016 19: 51
          +1
          I, too, Mikhail Polnikov is 100% right.!
    2. Incvizitor
      Incvizitor 29 December 2016 21: 22
      +1
      P. Dostan in the world are afraid and respect Russia.
  2. Alexdark
    Alexdark 29 December 2016 06: 35
    +1
    In hysteria, they all show only their cowardice ... It's a pity to look at this, neither pride nor honor.
  3. Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 29 December 2016 07: 00
    0
    Firstly, this or a similar article was already here !!! fool Secondly, let them be afraid !!! This nonsense we will not beat out of them in any way !!!
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 December 2016 12: 26
      +1
      Exactly, this is the third stupid article on this topic ...
      1. gladcu2
        gladcu2 29 December 2016 20: 25
        0
        Lopatov

        Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye. good

        Really stupid article.

        Well, if the Russian threat is fictitious. Well, so it is. The Russians do not want war.


        To the author a question.
        Then why do Britons need two teams? Well, if you started talking about it yourself?
        Can you tell me what the problem is? Britons have a problem, mean?

        Two brigades against the USSR? Even if the Poles help?

        Or in Russia, are you planning a coup?

        What for?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 30 December 2016 00: 04
          +1
          Quote: gladcu2
          Then why do Britons need two teams? Well, if you started talking about it yourself?

          The most question 8)))))
          In 12, the British authorities suddenly decided to completely reduce their own army. And this program is currently ongoing ...

          The citizens of Great Britain naturally have a cognitive dissonance: "Uh, guys, the Russian threat is growing, you tell us about this every day ... but you keep reducing the army. Something is wrong here ..."

          And then, all of a sudden, they remember replacing the old light reconnaissance tanks with the new "Ajax". They say "they will go and defeat everyone, there is no need to worry, by reducing we are making an incredibly powerful force out of the army, even one Ajax will disperse the crowds of Russian barbarians." In confirmation, showing beautiful computer graphics that the wunderwaffe is capable of destroying the Russian BMP-3 with three shells ...


          In general, the constant stories about the "Russian military threat" during the reduction in the number of troops that will be able to withstand this to only three (not two) motorized brigades and one airborne ... This really raises many questions. Is there still this "threat" ... According to the British authorities, there is. In their affairs, the threat is uniquely virtual
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 29 December 2016 07: 46
    0
    intended, as the British Defense Ministry reports, to “repel Russian aggression”


    Quite a blatant Saxon from the reels ... I wonder if psychiatry will help them? Probably not anymore.
  5. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 29 December 2016 08: 20
    +3
    Today they are planning two brigades, tomorrow they will want four. Brigades from scratch and are not created for free. The statement on the strengthening of NATO in Eastern Europe, the creation of new formations - all this has the goal of pushing Russia into an arms race. The Anglo-Saxons cannot understand with their "mind" that we have already been burned once on this and will not go for it again.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 December 2016 12: 25
      +1
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Today they plan two teams, tomorrow they want four.

      Four of them are planned laughing One airborne and three mechanized.
      It has nothing to do with the current hysteria; the Army 2020 plan was announced in the summer of 2012. The role of "Ajax" in fur. brigades is greatly exaggerated, they will simply replace the outdated light tanks "Yatagan" (modernized "Scorpion")

      in intelligence. battalions of brigades of the rapid reaction division, reconnaissance tank battalions and reconnaissance platoons of mechanized and motorized infantry battalions.

      Oh yes the most important thing "Army 2020" is a plan to significantly reduce the British Armed Forces laughing
  6. AleBors
    AleBors 29 December 2016 09: 25
    +1
    I do not share optimism. If the gun hangs, it will certainly shoot. All this swarming along the western borders is not just. God grant that it was my paranoia ..
  7. Thirteenth
    Thirteenth 29 December 2016 09: 25
    +1
    NATO officials stubbornly continue to believe that Russia is the number one threat to the military-political bloc.


    In my opinion, NATO members are right for all 100. Russia is one of the few countries that can, if necessary, cause real damage to the countries included in the bloc. Naturally, this makes them uncomfortable and they see us as a threat.
    1. Drshan
      Drshan 29 December 2016 17: 28
      +1
      So the Supreme said: "We are stronger than any AGGRESSOR." And their Wishlist is puffed up to prove the opposite.
  8. DM51
    DM51 29 December 2016 09: 48
    +2
    Please explain what the chip telescopic PSU, the pros and cons, they special. do you need a gun?
    1. Goodvin55
      Goodvin55 29 December 2016 10: 28
      0
      In that it can significantly increase firepower, without a significant increase in the size of ammunition.
      1. DM51
        DM51 29 December 2016 11: 01
        +1
        For example, how much? What about the cons? I think that the high cost and complexity of manufacturing a shell, something else?
  9. Goodvin55
    Goodvin55 29 December 2016 10: 34
    0
    The paragraph "As the experts said ..." can not be read, profanity and complete ignorance of the issue. "The Russian military completely abandoned the practice of using telescopic ammunition" - the author explain when this practice was ??? The fact that Russia has been developing a telescopic 45 for many years, and have not yet achieved success (series), is our flaw, and only for this reason, at the Epoch, we received an old 30-mm cannon that does not correspond to the tasks at the moment ..
  10. Crimean partisan 1974
    Crimean partisan 1974 29 December 2016 10: 45
    0
    I yell from the pictures of the armored feather, it’s interesting, but they tested this product in wet loam at -10 frost ?????? I would like to pick out how the guys will pick up
  11. K-50
    K-50 29 December 2016 12: 24
    +3
    In addition to the above, the shooting gun has a large number of gears and machining, which makes it unsuitable for warfare

    I don’t get the point, maybe not for average minds? request what
    Even if a weapon is difficult and expensive to manufacture, this is not an indicator of its unsuitability for conducting military operations. Generally article-bullshit. negative
  12. Stilet
    Stilet 29 December 2016 14: 35
    0
    Well, they had to show something as an alternative. They’ll have a wave now, DZ will hang and frighten everyone everywhere.
  13. silver_roman
    silver_roman 29 December 2016 16: 23
    +1
    Efficiency should become a distinctive feature of the formed tactical units, according to officials of the Ministry of Defense of Great Britain.

    laughing they will be able to quickly get to the front, quickly scoop up on their ayaks and quickly leave for another world!
  14. Indifference
    Indifference 29 December 2016 18: 58
    0
    They do not believe: but they are helped in this
  15. Dimont
    Dimont 29 December 2016 19: 26
    +1
    NATO representatives persist in believing that Russia is the number one threat to the military-political bloc. A clear testimony is the recent statement by the official London on the creation of two super mobile "shock brigades" ("Strike Brigades").

    NATO is beneficial to keep Russia in danger. This is already clear to everyone, far from politics. In the meantime, it will be beneficial, they will hysteria and build up military potential.
  16. SEER
    SEER 29 December 2016 19: 38
    0
    Quote: Mikhail Polnikov
    Afraid means respected ...

    new trends in the world: "we are afraid - it means we will earn"
  17. family tree
    family tree 29 December 2016 20: 21
    +2
    About the number of gears amused laughing
    Let these experts walk on foot, more in any gear bibik ..., not reliable, cho wassat
  18. Ostup bender
    Ostup bender 29 December 2016 21: 12
    +2
    The Baltic States ... two brigades ... and deployed groups of Chinese armies in areas bordering Russia, medium-range missiles, and generally a clear focus on a likely war for Russian territory, this is not a threat, this is normal. If you take cover with a blanket with your head, that's all not so scary.
  19. SEER
    SEER 29 December 2016 23: 07
    0
    Quote: OSTup bender
    The Baltic States ... two brigades ... and deployed groups of Chinese armies in areas bordering Russia, medium-range missiles, and generally a clear focus on a likely war for Russian territory, this is not a threat, this is normal. If you take cover with a blanket with your head, that's all not so scary.

    prokakaklso?
    At the moment, China is not our enemy. In 5-10 years we can see.
    1. Ostup bender
      Ostup bender 30 December 2016 14: 45
      +2
      I expressed my opinion. For this there are discussions and comments on this site. And you first learn to talk and write. I did not drink hawthorn with you and did not baptize children.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 3 January 2017 09: 46
      0
      Is nothing aimed at China?
  20. acrshooter
    acrshooter 30 December 2016 01: 20
    0
    In principle, I agree with the author, but I would like to clarify which specialists and experts were mentioned in this paragraph:
    According to experts, the effectiveness of guns with telescopic shells, which are equipped with "Ajax", is overvalued. Note that the United States prefers classic shells, and the Russian military completely departed from the practice of using telescopic munitions. In addition to the above, the weapon for firing has a large number of gears and mechanical processing, which makes it unsuitable for combat operations. “Ajax” will look good at the parade, but they are not suitable for a big war, ”commented military experts.

    Names, positions held and in which institutions, links to work in the relevant field, links to sources, "names and passwords" ... in general, a full range of information.
    And then in schools now, too, there are "expertoffs", especially active during the holidays ...